








■^y'. ■ •< a o- "s 












o 
> ^''^^^It^ ^^"^o^'^'-V ^^°-*>^^'.^ 










/>§t\/.^ 















4> 












■<-. 






THE ISSUE FAIRLY PRESENTER ^"^3 



THE SENATE BILL 



THE AMISSIOJ( OF KANSAS AS A STATE. 



DEMOCRACY, 



LAW, ORDEE, AND THE WILL OF TPIE MAJORITY OF 
THE WHOLE PEOPLE OF THE TERRITORY, 



BLACK REPUBLICANISM, 

USURPATION, REVOLUTION, ANARCHY, AND THE WILL 
OF A MEAGRE MINORITY. 



PUBLISHED BY ORDER OF THB DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE, 



WASHTNGTOX: 

FEINTED AT THB UNTOIir OFFICE. 

1S56. 




■'', s 



MAY 17-1991 ' 

% COPY 

5^£ ,.,\ 5>vi^' 






,9^ 



n^ 



TO THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES. 



The Democratic National Committee — with the hope of allaying 
in some degree the wild excitement now prevailing in ixiany sections 
of the country in reference to the unhappy state of affairs in Kansas, 
and also of disahusing the public mind upon the subject of the 
designs and principles of the democratic party with regard to the 
question of slavery in the territories — ask the attention ol the public 
to a practical issue now made up between the two parties, in the 
course of recent congressional legislation. We propose fairly and 
fearlessly to appeal to the people, whether the bill passed by the 
democratic senators on the 2d of July instant_, to admit Kansas as a 
State by a prescribed process, is not preferable to the adoption of the 
crude, partial, and revolutionary measure commonly called the Topeka 
Constitution. Other questions may he incidentally glanced at; but 
our main purpose on this occasion will be to show, by a distinct and 
definite appeal to the record, that (whether in or out of Congress,) 

THE BLACK REPUBLICAN LEADERS DO NOT DESIRE PEACE IN KANSAS 
PRIOR TO THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION! 

The question of human slavery has been a topic of partisan dis- 
cussion ever since our government began ; but it is in relation to the 
territories of the Union that it has presented itself in the most com- 
plicated and dangerous form. 

To discuss this question at length, in any of its various aspects, is 
wholly foreign to our present purpose. We shall not undertake to 
determine why the God of nature made the African inferior to the 
white man; or why He permitted England to fasten the institution 
of slavery upon the colonies against their repeated and earnest remon- 
strances. Nor can we tell what Heaven in its wisdom may intend to 
work out of the relations of master and slave, as they now exist in 
several of the United States. 

This, however, we do know, and will add, that when these States, 
as independent parties, agreed to come under a common Constitution 
and into a common Union — it was upon terms of perfect equality, for 
the mutual and equal benefit of all, and that African slavery was one 
of the recognized subjects of that compact. All power over it was 
expressly reserved to each member of the confederacy. 

Nothing was yielded, and no new right in this respect was added, 
except that each State bound itself to return to any other, upon de- 



mand, fugitives from legal servitude. We know, too, in relation to 
any comiTactj.it is always good faith and good morals to keep it in 
vfhole, as well as in part; in the spirit as well as to the letter ;_ in 
regard to Territories as well as in reference to the States of this Union. 
An evasion of a promise or covenant is as immoral as a bold and open 
breach of it; and involves, in addition, the contempt which inevitably 
falls upon trickery or cowardice. It is obvious, then, that the success 
of any attempt practically to disregard a particular feature of the Con- 
stitution, wliether relating to the rendition of fugitives from labor, or 
any other distinct guarantee to the citizens or the States, would ope- 
rate as a virtual abandonment and demoralization of the whole instru- 
ment, an event which the Union could not long survive. 

The ordinance of 1787, which seems to have been established with- 
out much objection at the time, adjusted the subject of slavery in the 
Northwestern Territory. Again in 1820, Congress, after an angry 
and exciting controversy^ passed a law, excluding the institutioii from 
that part of the Louisiana territory which lies north of a certain par- 
allel of latitude. In 1845, when Texas was admitted into the Union, 
this line of inhibition was also applied to that State. 

But when the acquisition of territory from Mexico once more pre- 
sented this subject, the mode of adjustment by a geographical line 
was considered, and finally rejected by Congress; and this mainly by 
the votes and influence of the very same brood of agitators who now 
affect to regret the abandonment of the principle ! This result created 
the necessity of resorting to some other mode of settling the question. 
Finally, in" 1850, after a period of great agitation throughout the 
country, the leading patriots and wise men of both parties, such as 
Clay, Webster, Cass, and others, decided upon leaving this question 
•where it always ought to have been left, and where the true spirit of 
oiir institutions places it — in the hands and under the control of the peo- 
'fjU of the Teiritories themselves, restrained only by the Constitution.^ 

The whole nation rejoiced in this wise adjustment, and all parties 
claimed it ap a finality as to this principle of territorial organization. 
For once, the question of slavery in the Territories was settled upon 
tlie principles of our revolutionary fathers, who demanded a voice 
and a vote in regulating their own institutions ; the same great fun- 
damental principles of human government, which underlie and 
uphold our whole republican system — principles suited to all Terri- 
tories and to all times, and as "broad and enduring as eternal truth. 
This form of adjustment Avas denominated non-intervention by Con- 
gress — self-government by the people of the Territories. 

In 1854, when it became necessary to organize the Territories of 
Kansas and Nebraska, it was deemed just and proper to extend these 
principles of seli^government to those Territories, regardless of the 
restrictive Missouri line. It seemed manifestly unjust to accord such 
hisxh privileges to citizens who might reside in tlie Territories of 
Washington, Utah, and New Mexico, and deny their enjoyment to 
those who sliould go to Kansas and Nebraska. Nor did it seem 
right to reject the practical use of a great principle, whicli had been 
so universally approved by all pa'rties. The Kansas-Nebraska act 
accordingly became a law of the laud. 



Then it was that the abolition party renewed their schemes of agi- 
tation. Up to that hour, they had scarcely ceased to denounce fhe 
Missouri dema,rcation as unconstitutional, arbitrary, and unjust. Their 
indignation at its adoption had been unbounded. No public man 
who had sustained it, that was within their reach, escaped their ven- 
geance. Bui no sooner had this arbitrary rule been superseded by 
one more republican and reasonable, than their admiration for the 
former suddenly burst forth in the strongest terms. They now af- 
fected to see in it the force and virtue of a solemn compact of f»-ood 
faith, justice, and liberty ; and proceeded to denounce tliose who fa- 
vored its re})eal with as much bitterness as they had employed at an 
earlier day, a<.';ainst tliose wlio had sanctioned its adoption. 

Eeckless and inconsistent upon this ■subject to the very last, these 
desperate agitators are now engaged in charging the unhappy state 
of society in Kansas +o the legislation of th6 Democratic party, and 
as consequent upon the incorporation of the principles of self-gov- 
ernment into the organic law of Kansas Territory ; forgetting, or 
wiifuliy overlooking the fa-ct, that in Washington, Utah, and New 
Mexico, all orgaiiized upon the same principle, there is entire quiet and 
good order. It would be equally logical and true to say in reply and 
in defence, that they themselves became the authors of the evils in 
Kansas, by rejecting the extension of the Missouri line fo the Pacific, 
as a final adjustment, when proposed by Judge Douglas in 1848. 
Some other mode of adjustment vvas thus, and by their own act, ren- 
deied absolutely necessary; and that ap])liBd to Kansas was devised 
by the wisest men of the nation^ in 1850, to meet the exigencies then 
presented. 

But the real purposes of the agitators cannot be concealed. Ex- 
citement on the slavery question is the very life-blood of their fanat- 
ical organization. Take this away, and there remains to them only 
a few minor and kindred topics, by the agitation of which they can 
hope to secure position and notoriety. 

Upon the subject of Kansas, these leaders sanctimoniously, and 
with atfectation of great humanity, claim before the public a desire 
only to advance the interests of peace, and to secure for the settler in 
that Territory a just and equal State government, of his own nnawed 
and untrammelled choice. They have uniformly contended in Con- 
gress that the free State party were largely in the majority, and that 
all they desired was, that the popular will should be fairly reflected 
on the sul)ject of slavery ; and that the proper remedy for the evils in 
Kansas was her prompt admission as a State. 

Mark, now, the progress of events in Congress, and judge of the 
sincerity of these professions. On the 23d day of July, Mr. Toombs, 
a southern senator, submitted a proposition for the early admission of 
Kansas as a State, by authorizing the present inhabitants, in a pre- 
scribed manner, to foim a State constitution in November next. The 
main features of this measure, as finally passed by the Senate, are 
hereto appended, so that the reader can come to his own conclusion as 
to the fairness of its provisions. 

A leading and vital idea of this bill, it v/ill be seen, is to terminate 
at once all inducement on tho part of outsiders to force temporary 



population into the Territory, with the view of controlling a decision 
on the question of slavery. The sole right to influence such decision 
is confined to citizens who may have already become hojia fide inhab- 
itants of the Territory ; thus ending this angry struggle, and giving 
peace to the whole country. This movement produced a deep sensa- 
tion in the Senate and throughout the Union, and no small share of 
consternation amongst the Kansas agitators, who saw in it the ele- 
ments of destruction of their vocation. It struck all right-minded 
men as eminently just and wise in its provisions. Even Senator Hale, 
so distinguished for his aversion to everything emanating from a 
southern source, could not restrain his admiration, and almost invol- 
untarily paid it the following just tribute : 

" But, sir, I do not want to dwell on that subject, but to speak a 
very few words in reference to this bill which has been introduced 
by the Senator from Greorgia. I take this occasion to say that the 
bill, as a whole, does great credit to the magnanimity, to the patriot- 
ism, and to the sense of justice of the honorable senator who intro- 
duced it. It is a much fairer bill than I expected from that latitude. 
I say so because I am always willing and determined, when 1 have 
occasion to speak anything, to do ample justice. I think the bill is 
almost unexceptionable." 

Aiiex having been read in due course in the Senate, it was referred 
to the proper committee of that body ; which subsequently returned it 
with amendments, accompanied by an elaborate and able report, in 
which the subject is thus treated : 

"The existing government in the Territory of Kansas was organized 
in pursuance of an act of Congress approved May 30, 1850, instituting 
temporary governments for the Territoiies of Nebraska and Kansas, 
preliminary to their admission into the Union on an equal footing 
with the original States, so soon as they should have the requisite popu- 
lation. The organic law of Kansas is identical with that of Nebraska 
in all its provisions and principles. Each is based on that great fun- 
damental principle of self-government which imderlies our whole sys- 
tem of republican institutions, as promulgated in the Declaration of 
Independence, consecrated by the blood of the Revolution, and consoli- 
dated and firmly established by the Constitution of the United States. 
Each recognizes the right of the people thoreof, while a Territory, to 
form and regulate their own domestic instituti(m8 in their own way, 
subject only to the Constitution of the United States, and to be received 
into the Union, so soon as they should. attain the requisite number of 
inhabitants, on an equal footing with the original States in all respects 
whatever. These two Territcn-ies were thus organizetl in 1854, under 
the authority of the same act of Congress, with equal rights, privi- 
leges, and immunities, and with the same safeguards and guarantees 
for the quiet enjoyment of their liberties, without molestation by for- 
eign interference or domestic violence. 

"• In Nebraska the inhabitants have enjoyed all the blessings which 
it is possible for a law-abiding people to derive from the faithful ad- 
ministration of a wise and just government. Life, liberty, and prop- 
erty have been held sacred, the elective franchise has been preserved 
inviolate, and all the rights of the citizen have been jirotected against 



fraud or violence^ by laws of his own making. These are the legiti- 
mate fruits of the principle, the practical results of fidelity to the 
provisions of the Nebraska organic act. There was no foreign inter- 
ference with their domestic affairs, no fraudulent attempts to control 
the elections by non-resident voters. Emigrant aid societies, with 
their affiliated associations and enormous capital, did not extend their 
operations to Nebraska, and hence there were no counter schemes 
formed to control the elections and force institutions upon the Territory 
regardless of the rights and wishes of the bona fide inhabitants. The 
principle of the organic law, the right of the people to manage their 
internal affairs, and control their domestic concerns in obedience to 
the Federal Constitution, was permitted to have fair play, and work 
out its natural and legitimate results. Hence, peace, security, and 
progress, in all the elements of prosperity in this Territory, have vin- 
dicated the wisdom and policy of the Nebraska act. 

"Fortunate would it have been for the peace and harmony of the 
republic, and still more fortunate for the unhappy people of Kansas, 
had they been permitted, in the undisturbed enjoyment of their ac- 
knowledged rights, to derive similar blessings from the same organic 
law. Your committee can perceive no reason why the same causes 
would not have produced like results in Kansas but for the misguided 
efforts of non-residents of the Territory, citizens of different States, 
who had no moral or legal right to interfere with the elections and 
legislation of the Territory, to seize upon the legislative power through 
the ballot-box, and thus control the local and domestic institutions of 
a feeble and sparsely settled Territory." 

This measure of peace and justice, so well described in the report, 
came up in the Senate for final passage on the 2d day of July, and 
was steadily resisted by the Republican Senators, during a prolonged 
session of twenty-one hours. Notwithstanding the declarp.tion of Mr. 
Hale, that the proposition was a fair one — ' ' almost unexceptionable ' ' — 
it encountered the bitterest hostility. Objection after objection was 
presented, and promptly removed by the friends of the bill — until it 
was made niamfeM that the Republican Senators had determined to 
cccept no measure of peace. Mr. Seward discarded all attempts to 
accommodate it to his views, and vauntingly declared that ^Hhe day 
for compromises had gone by." 

It was first objected, that the laws of the Territory restrain the free 
discussion of the question of slavery, and impose test oaths for suffrage 
and office, and consequently the pro-slavery party would have the ad- 
vantage. The friends of the measure answered, that all such laws 
are in conflict with the Constitution and the organic act of Congress, 
and the bill may be made to provide for their repeal. 

Then it was alleged that many of the free State men had been driven 
out of the Territory, and therefore the bill would make Kansas a slave 
State. This objection was promptly met by an amendment in the 11th 
section, giving all such an opportunity to return and have their names 
registered, and participate in the election for delegates to make a con- 
stitution. 

It was next said that the penalties for abusing or obstructing the 
right of suffrage were too light, and these were immediately increased. 



' s 

The last discoverj was, that the President, with tlie consent of the 
Senate, had the right to appoint the commissioners, and they had no 
confidence in this appointing power. To meet this ditficultj, General 
Cass rose in his place and gave them a pledge, on the part of the 
President and the Senate, that the commissioners should be selected 
from both political parties, and all be men of the highest integrity and 
ability. 

Then they evinced their want of sincerity in all their obiections to 
the details, by voting in a body for the proposition of Senator Wilson 
to strike out the entire bill, and insert, instead, a single section, re- 
]>ealing all the laws now in force in Kansas, and leaving the people 
in anarchy and confusion ! 

The senator from New Hampshire, (Mr. Hale,) having recovered 
from his right impulses under the party lash, came forward and moved 
to defer the eifect of the bill to July, 1857, so that the struggle might 
last another year — in order " that Kmisas and liberty might bleed" till 
after the presidential election ; and in this he was sustained by the 
vote of every republican senator ! 

Mr. Seward, the file leader of- the factionists, did his part by mov- 
ing to strike out the entire bill, and inserting anotlier admitting 
Kansas into the Union under the Topeka constitution, and was sus- 
tained in this by his entire party. Many other amendments were- 
ofi^red, all designed to defeat the object of the bill, or to force its 
friends to cast votes liable to misrepresentation. 

But at last the test vote could no longer be avoided. They had said 
t^e remedy for the evils in Kansas was her prompt admission as a 
State; that the territorial laws were odious and oppressive, and must 
]>e repealed; that the elective franchise had been abused, and it must 
be protected ; that the free State party were largely in the ascendancy, 
and the voice of the majority must be heard. The bill provided for 
ftU these things. What tlien did these black republicans do? Did 
they act up to their professions by favoring this measure of relief and 
])acification for Kansas? It is almost incredible tliat they did not. 
They resisted it to the bitter end. They deliberately voted against 
tlie repe<al of the laws subversive of the liberty of speech and freedom 
of the press ; against the prompt admission of Kansas as a State, and, 
virtually, in favor of the continuance of the present territorial gov- 
ernment and laws ! It is no justification to say that they preferred the 
'J'opeka constitution ; that measure had already failed ; and this Senate 
bill then came up as against the present government and laws of 
Kansas. These ^'•friends of Kansas" decided in fiivor of the latter. 
From this record there is no escape. Failing to get the Topeka con- 
stitution, which they had claimed as the best thing that could be done, 
thoy were bound, as honest men and patriots, to go for the next best ; 
but they have made their record. 

What clearer evidence can we have that these agitators do not de- 
sire peace in Kansas than is furnished in this brief and true history? 
The proof amounts almost to demonstration. 

But now for tlicir remedy — the Topeka constitution. It was ol>- 
jrf^cted to by the democratic senators because it was the work of a party, 
"and not of the whole people ; because that work was commenced with- 



9 

cut aiitliority of law, and prosecuted in open defiance and menace of 
the government and its authority, emanating from and partaking of 
a spirit of rebellion at every step; because its recocfiiition by Congress 
too I'M furnish authority and precedent for revolution against the govern- 
'nient, oji the ground of alleged grievances, icithout any previous effort to 
gain redress by 'petition — a step too hazardous, as we believe, for any 
government. K very "brief history of the Topeka movement will he 
tiufficient to convince all of- the truth of these allegations, 

ORIGIX AXD AIVI OF THE TOPEKA MOVEMENT. 

Preparatory to tlio Topeka movement two conventions were lield — 
the first at Lawrence on the 14th of August, and the second at Big 
Springs on the 5th of September. The proceedings of tlie Lawrence 
meeting are based on the declaration, '' Tliat the people of Kansas 
Territory have been since its settlement, and now are, without any 
law-making power," &c. 

At the Big Springs convention the following resolutions were uaan- 
iniously adoj^ted ; 

" Besolved, That this convention, in view of its recent repudiation of the acts of the 
so-called Kansas legislative assembly, respond most heartily to the call made by the 
people's couventiou of the 14th ultimo for a dele;^ate convention of the people of Kansas, 
to be held at Topeka on the 19th in.-itant, to consider the propriety of the formalioa of a 
State constitution, and such matters as may legitimately come before it. 

^^ liexolved, That we owe no allegiance or obedience to the tyrannical enactments of 
this spurious legiahitvre; that their laws have no validity or binding force upon the peo- 
ple of Kansas; and that every freeman among- us is ?.t full liberty, consistently with his 
obligations as a citizen and a man, to defy and resist them, if he choose so to do. 

^'Jiesolccd, That we v/ill endure and submit to these laws no longer than the best iii- 
terests of the Territory require, as the least of two evils, and will resist thenj to a bloody 
issue a,s soon as we ascertain t}?at peaceable remedies shall fail, and forcible resist- 
ance shall furnish asy reasonable prospect of success ; and that, in the mean time, we 
recommend to our friends throughout the Territory the organization and disoipliue of 
volunteer companies, and the procurement and preparation of arms.'' 

xlddressGS of the most inflammatory character v/ere made by Gov- 
ernor Eeeder and others, avowing their determination to resort to 
force in case their views were not adopted by the government ; tluxt 
^ ' they must c-onqtter, or mingle the bodies of the oppressor icith those of 
the oppressed in a oomrnon grave.'' 

But all doubt on this point v*7is settled by the action of the conven- 
tion itself, immediately after it met on the 4tli day ©f October, 1855, 
as can be seen by the proceedings. 

A resolution was oflered by ?dr. Smith instructing the various com- 
mittees to shape their proceedings with reference to an immediate 
organization of a State government, irrespective of any action of Con- 
gress. The proposition was adopted at the end of a long debate, in 
the course of which Mr. Detahay, who now claims a seat in Congress 
under the constitution made by that body, made a powerful appeal 
against it, on the groimd that it made the convention "'on act of 
rebellion" against the government; but he was answered by the ma- 
jority that ^'they shoidd not, and woidd not, toait one day for the action 
of Congress." 

The constitution framed by the revolutionary convention was sub- 
mitted to a vote of the people, and it is a di-sputcd point whether it 



10 

received 700 or 1,700 out of the 6,000 then in the Territory! Jta 
advocates only claim for it the sanction of 1,700 people, whilst the 
other side say it did not receive half that number. 

Colonel James H. Lane, claiming a seat in the United States Senate, 
on behalf of the State erected by this constitution, was deputed to 
convey to Congress the memorial of the so-called legislature, praying 
for the admission of the State so constituted into the Union. The 
scene which followed its presentation in the senate will long be re- 
membered. The document was handed to the venerable Senator from 
Michigan (Mr. Cass) within a few minutes of the opening of the ses- 
sion, with the request that he would present it, which he did. In 
the course of the debate, on a proposition to refer and print it, the 
discovery was made that the paper was not an original one ; that the 
signatures were all in the same handwriting ; that it was blurred on 
every page by erasures and interlineations. A closer examination 
ju'oved that it was a virtual fraud ; that it bore no evidence of autho- 
rity ; that the revolutionary ground on which the convention and 
members of the legislature had first based their action had been 
stricken from it, and that it had evidently been recently shaped to suit ' 
the vieios of the repuUican onemhers of Congress/ They had taken 
ground that the Topeka convention was "a peaceable assembling of 
the people to petition for redress," and the memorial was mutiiated 
to suit their partisan ends. Like Mr, Delahay, they had not the 
courage to stand up to it if called "rebellion." It must be shaped to 
suit their partisan issue, though fraud and forgery became the agents 
of the work. This disfigured document, so imposed upon the Senate, 
was indignantly hurled back by a vote of 32 yeas to 3 nays^ and has 
remained in silent oblivion ever since ! 

It is true that the minority of the Committee on Territories in the 
Senate made a very unfair, though futile attempt to redeem this move- 
ment from the odium cast about it by its rebellious and revolutionary 
aspect, claiming that it was only "a peaceable assembling of the 
people to petition for redress of grievances." To accomplish this end, 
the true imi)ort of the opinion of Attorney General Butler, in the 
Arkansas case, was deliberately perverted. Such portions only were 
used as answered the ends of the committee; and in this way many 
honest people have been misled as to the analogy between the Topeka 
movement and that of the people of Arkansas. Had the committee 
used the entire opinion it would have been fatal to their case. The 
Attorney General, it is true, conceded the right of the people peace- 
ably to assemble and to make a written constitutiuu, a report of their 
prayer to Congress for admission into the Union ns a State, but he 
added, '■'■ provided alioays, that such measure he cornmcriccd. and prose- 
cuted in a peaceahle manner, in strict subordination to fJie territoi^ial 
government, and in entire subserviency to the j^otuer of Congress to adopt, 
reject, or disregard them at pleasure." We submit to the people of 
the United States to determine, without further comment, whether it 
is fair or candid to pretend that the Topeka constitu'lion falls within 
these rules and principles. 



11 

MICHIGAN VINDICATED AGAINST AN UNFAIR COMPARISON 

Attempts have also been made to find a precedent for this lawless 
niovenient in the circumstances surrounding the admission of the State 
oi Michigan. But the following remarks of General Cass, in reply 
to Mr. Sumner, on this point, and the views of his colleague, I\Ir. 
Stewart, presented in another part of tliis address, will settle the un- 
fairness of that plea beyond cavil. 

Mr. Cass. I have listened with equal regret and surprise to the speech of the honor- 
able Senator from Massachusetts. Such a speech — the most un-American and unpa- 
triotic that ever grated on the ears of the members of this hi^'h body — as I hope never 
to hear again here or elsewhere. But, sir, I did not rise to make any comments on the 
speech of the honorable Senator, open as it is to the highest censure and disapprobation. 
I rise for another purpose. The honorable Senator has so misunderstood and misap- 
plied the case of Michigan, which he brings forward as a justification of the proceed- 
ings in Kansas, that, as I know the facts connected with it, I feel bound to say a few 
words — and but very few they will be — to the Senate upon the subject. 

The honorable Senater has spoken of ihe right of the people to form conventions with 
a view to obstruct the authorized laws of the country. I deny such a right. I do not 
deny the right of any portion of the American people to form conventions : but con- 
ventions formed to obstruct the existing laws of the country, unless they succeed, are 
rebellion. The conventions to which the Senator alluded were held in times of revolu- 
tion. He referred to the early proceedings in Virginia, while the country was in a state 
of revolution ; when the people rose up to assert their rights ; when the Government was 
apposed to them ; and when they had to take measures in iheir own hands to put cL;wn 
British tyranny and oppression. These were acts of revolution, and justified conven- 
tions; but the American people now have no justification for acts of rebellion. W!i"'m 
do they rebel against? Themselves. The majority always can control the elections, 
and give form and substance to their representatives to procure any measures they 
please — not, perhaps, to-day, or within a week, or a month ; but the time must come 
shortly when they will be felt. So much for the States. And Congress is always ready 
to afford relief and protection to the Territories. 

Michigan was guilty of no such crime as that, T am proud to say. The proceedings 
in that State have no analogy with the proceedings in Kansas. The convention in 
Michigan was not for the purpose of opposing ths law. Let me explain the circum- 
stances in a few words. 

The ordinance of Congress of 1787 provided, as I have already said in the Senate, for 
three States certainly, and two more at the will of Congress, within the Northwest Terri- 
tory. If the number was increased to five, the first three States were to be bounded on 
the north by a line running due east from the southern extreme of Lake Michigan. 
Congress made provision for the three States — Ohio, Indiana, and Illinois. When Ohio 
came into the Union, she proposed that her boundary, instead of being the east line, 
siJiould, if it was found that that line would strike Lake Erie south >i.i' the north cape of 
t^e Maumee Bay, be a straight line from the southern extremity of Lake Michig;in to 
tihe north cape of Maumee Bay. 

When her constitution came before Congress for acceptance, a committee of the House 
of Representatives, at the head of which was John Randolph, took charge of this sub- 
ject, and that committee reported that Congress ought not to change the line. Congress 
had, in the mean time, provided for the territory of Michigan, wiih the east line for its 
aouthern boundary. The Senate will recollect that the provision of the ordinance of 
Congress of 1787, with respect to tlie States to be formed in that region, was, that when 
they had sixty thousand i.'ihabitants they should be admitted, by their delegates, into the 
Union. The words were, " should be entitled by their delegates to take a seat in Cofi- 
grsss." It was contended, in early times, in that country, and, for myself, I think cor- 
rectly, that the people, at any time when they numbered sixty thousand, under that ordi- 
nance, had the ri;i;ht themselves, through the action of the Territorial Legislature, to 
c<:)me forward and claim admission. That was the foundation of the proceedings of the 
State of Michigan based oh the law which I now state. 

Michigan had a population of sixty thousand, and came forward for admission into the 
Union. A convention was called, not by the act of the people — that is, not by the act of 
individuals — but by a law passed by the Territorial Legislature. Their convention as- 



12 

eoTabled anrl formed a State constitution, and came forward claiminof their boundary to 
the line established by the ordinance of Congress, and not acknowledging the Ohio fine. 
My honorable friend from California, who was then a citizen of Ohio, I presume was ia 
the State at the time. He knows there was almost civil war. He must remember thaJ 
the militia of Ohio and Michigan were called out. I was here in the Cabinet, of Generai 
Jackson. I knew his anxiety. We were all apprehensive that a war might bre!j.k out. 

In reply to Mr. Wade and Mr. Trumbull, who had argued that the 
admission of Michigan into the Union furnished a precedent for accept- 
ing Kansas on the Topeka constitution, Mr. Stewart submitted the 
following overwhelming argument : 

" If the Senator will hear me, I will show him that he is mistaken in every particular. 
Ill the first place, the ordinance of 1787 authorized a certain number of States to be 
formed out of the Northwestern Territory, and authorized their admission into the Union 
whenever they should have sixty thousand inhabitants. Acting upon that authority, the 
Territorial Legislature of Michigan, afier we had that number of inhabitants and more, 
passed a law to enable the people to elect delegates to a State convention to form a State 
constitution. Those delegates were elected, and they formed a State constitution, and 
submitted the adoption of it to the people of the Territory, and the people adopted the 
constitution. They elected a legislature under it, and they elected their senators to Con- 
gress. The people elected a representative to the other House. They came here, and 
dema,nded admission into the Union. All this was done in virtue of the territorial laws 
of Michigan, acting in virtue of the ordinance of 17H7. When they came here, Ohio 
disputed the southern boundary. That boundary included the mouth of the Maumee 
river. It had, up to that time, been within the jurisdiction of the Territory of Michigan, 
It had not been within the jurisdiction of Ohio. All the officers, township and county^ 
justices of the peace, and all others, were Michigan officers down to the southern boun- 
dary vi^hich we claimed; but Ohio claimed a right to that portion of the Territory, 
Congress took up the subject, and determined that Michigan should release that boun- 
dary, and carry it ten miles further north, as a condition of being adm.itted into the 
Union; and they determined that that consent should be given by 'a convention of the 
people,' That is the language of the law of Congress. They did not say how that con- 
vention should be called. They did not say that it should be called by the legislature. 
They did not say that there should be legislative consent ; but they said a convention of 
the people of Micliigan should consent to that boundary. The legislature afterwards 
called a convention, and that convention rejected the proposition. The people then took 
up the subject themselves, and they called a convention. That convention accepted the 
proposition, and that acceptance was sent to the President of the United States. He 
transmitted it to Congress ; and Congress, after full debate, decided that that acceptance 
was within the terms of its own law. Therefore, you see, sir, that there was Jiot a move- 
ment in Michigan, from the beginning to the end, that was not in accordance with the 
provisions of a law, either of the Territory or of Congress, or of both. Now, here ia 
the Topeka constitution, formed throughout v/ithout law from its inception to its end, 
admittedly by its friends, and yet it is said to be a parallel case to Michigan. I submit 
that there is not a single circumstance, from its commencement to its end, that is parallel; 
and I hope (although I confess ttiat I have no ground to hope, from past experience) 
that it will not be asserted, at least here again, that the case of Kansas and the case of 
Michigan are parallel." 

There are also a few additional features of this Topeka isovement 
which are not inappropriate at this point. They may serve to illus- 
trate the sincerity and consistency of its advocates as the friends of 
the colored race and the opponents of laws not authorized by a ma- 
jority of the people. 

One is the 1st section of the 11th article of the constitution, to be 
found on page G31 of the report of tlie House committee to investiT 
gate Kansas affairs, which provides that the constitution shall not be 
amended or altered prior to the year 1805, nine years after its adop- 
tion. The black republicans have indulged in unlimited denuncia- 



13 

tlons of tlie laws of Kansas, because a majority of the people did not 
authorize their adoption, and yet, at the same time, you see they in- 
sist upon the recognition of a constitution, unalteraUe for nine years, 
brought forth in the most informal mode, and unsustaiued by that 
great element of authority, the popular will. 

Another is, that at the time the constitution was made it was deter- 
mined to submit to a vote of the people the question of admitting or 
esccluding free people of color from the State; the decision to be bind- 
ing upon the legislature. The vote on this subject can be found in 
the report of the committee, between pages 718 and 755, inclusive, 
showing a decided majority in favor of '' exclusion." 

On page fi45, under the ominous caption of " Constituiional Pro- 
clo.mation/'' James H. Lane^ as chairman of the executive constitu- 
tional committee, announces the result of the vote as follows, to wit : 

" And I do furtber proclaim and make known, that of the votes east at the aforesaid 
election for and ajrtiinst the passai^e of a law, by the General Assembly, providing for 
the EXCLUSION OF FREE NEGROES FROM THE State OF Kansas, the result of such Vote to 
operate as instructions to the first General Assembly — a ■majority are in favor of eccclu- 
i-ion^ as ascertained by the returns of said election now on iile in the office of the execu- 
tive comiuitte<3. 

"James H. Lane, Chairman Executive Committee.'^ 

Here is a specimen of the humanity and liberality of tliose who 
ere so constantly "shrieking for liberty in Kauvsas," who are dailv 
fehedding crocodile tears over the liardtships of the do^m-troddeiii 
negro. They are the advocates of the same provision, resisted in 
1819 by Mr. Adams and others, the insertion of which in the con- 
stitution of Missouri kept her out of the U^ion until she repealed it. 
These phihmthropists mean to have Kansas free, indeed — ^f'ree of 
colored freemen as well as of slaves! Expulsion of the colored race,, 
bond and free, from the enjoyment of the rich valleys and inue air of 
free Kansas, is what they mean by liberty and equalitj- — the hypo- 
ci'ites. 

We have now, fellow-citizens, given you the history and character 
of the measure which the friends of Colonel Fremont v/ish you to 
sustain in preference to the wise and just law passed by a democratic 
Senate ; and we shall await your verdict with confidence. We are 
entirely certain that you will never sanction a measure so fraught 
with mischief to our institutions — so tarnished with violence, insub- 
ordination, disorder, and fraud, and so unsustained by that great 
element of governmental power, the" will of the people. 

DEBATE IN THE SENATE. 

We now ask you to read the following remarks, of Mr. Toombs, 
delivered on the 2d of July, in explanation of the character and effect 
of his bill, and his views and purposes in presenting it. We are 
quite certain that you will agree with us that they are able, clear, and 
patriotic, and evince no want of courage or frankness in the author 
of this great measure of freedom and justice. 

Mr. Toombs said : 

Mr. President and Senators : It was not at first my purpose to add anythinfr fo the 
observations which I made when I gave notice of the bill which is substantially the one 



14 

now before the Senate. I have never been unrler the necessity of making one speech to 
explain another. Though that was brief, it told plainly what I wanted, what I meant to 
do, and how I intended to do it. At the same lime, I declared my willingness to accept 
suggestions from those who agreed with me, so as to do these things in the most efFectual 
manner. With that view, I accepted with pleasure the few amendments to the bill pro 
posed by the Committee on Territories, and was c>«bli</ed to them for correcting my own 
errors in matters of detail with which they were much better acquainted than myself. 
Nor, sir, would the motion of the senator from Massachusetts (Mr. Wilson) liave altered 
my determination but for its being seconded by the senator from New York, (Mr. Seward,) 
acco.mpanied with the assignment of reasons so untenable and extraordinary for his 
position. 

The senator from New York, in a speech delivered some two months since, after re 
counting the various grievances of the people of Kansas, (which had no other founda- 
tion than his owq imagination, and the unreliable sources from which he usually derives 
his information, sustained not by proof but by intrepid assertions,) called upon the 
Senate, and upon the country, to give peace to Kansas by introducing her as a State, 
with the Topeka constitution. The foundation upon which he offered that constitution 
to the acceptance of the Senate and the country was, that it was the voice of Kansas, the 
will of her bona fide inhabitants. He assumed, enlarged upon it-, and proclaimed it to 
the civilized world as a fact, that the voice of Kansas was smothered by invasion, that 
her true people were overrun and conquered by aliens, that their ballot-boxes were seized 
and their liberties were trampled under foot by foreigners, and he demanded that you 
should give justice to Kansas by allowing her people to make their own institutions. 
When he made that demand, though I admitted none of his assertions to be true, though 
I denied the truth of every single fact upon which he based his demand, I thought I saw 
in bis demand a basis for a speedy and satisfactory adjustment of this question, if he 
were sincere in his demand. I had again and again avowed my purpose to allow the 
people of Kansas the right to make their own domestic institutions, under the organic 
law and the constitution. I stood pledged to that policy ag a public man, a pledge which 
I have again and again, at this session and at previous sessions, reiterated my readiness 
to redeem. 

Then there was a common point of agreement between us. It was not npon past 
grievances ; for there we differed. It was not upon his allegation of frauds or injuries 
inflicted on the inhabitants ; for those I denied to the extent stated by him and his friends. 
But we agreed that the people of Kansas should legislate for themselves, without the 
intervention of force, fear, or fraud. We had but oue point to settle — what was the will 
of Kansas? That senator asserted that the Topeka constitution was the true exponent 
of that popular will, and as such he demanded its acceptance. He put it to the Senate, 
the country, and the civilized world, that such was the fact. I did not thitik he believed 
it; I do not think so now ; but I determined to meet him fairly on that issue, to test the 
sincerity of these declarations. I was willing to give down-trodden Kansas, if she be 
down-trodden, a right to make her own institutions, under the constitution, according to 
her own will. This is the principle upon which I supported the Kansas-Nebraska hill. 
I stood upon it in no fraudulent or double sense, but as an bonest man ready to main- 
tain it in the Senate and before the country, at any time and at all times. I determined 
to give peace to the country, if this would do it. It was in aflirmance and not in dero- 
gation of the principles advocated by the friends of the origi-nal Kansas bill. I only re- 
quired one feet to be established: Is the Topeka constitution ths voice of Kansas ? This 
is the only question I asked; this is the sole demand 1 made; tlus is the sole difference 
between my proposition and that proposed by the senator from New York. I did not 
believe he wanted any settlement of this question, and he has sinc« satisfied me. abund- 
antly of the truth of that belief. I believe he wanted grievances ; I believe he wanted 
discord; I believe he wanted anything but peace; I believe he wanted nothing but revo 
lution, or a state of things sufficiently near it as to give power to his party. I will ofifer 
the evidence of this belief to the Senate and the country. He and his assoeiates told us 
this same story, with all its variations — the free-soilers, the abolitionists, the two senators 
from New York, the senator from Vermont, (Mr. Collaraer.) and others repeated it. I 
believe the senator from Vermont went so far as to suppose that nineteen-twenticths, or 
some other large number, of the Kansas population were all on one side. He told us in 
his report that Kansas was down-trodden ; that the laws made by the legislature were 
not the laws of Kansas, but were made by representatives of Missouri ; that the nuijority 
of the people of Kansas abhorred them ; that they were imposed on them by force and 
by fraud. 



15 

Mr. Coi.LAMER. Is the gentleman alluding to me? 

Mr. Toombs. Yes, sir. In the senator's speech he said the laws were against the will 
of the real settlers. 

Mr. CoLLAMEU. I said— and I produced my proof by reference to the returns— that 
the legislature was elected by Missouri votes. 

Mr. Toombs. And did not represent the will of the people of the Territory ? 

Mr. CoLLAMER. Yes. 

Mr. Toombs. That is what I stated. 

Mr, CoLLAMER. I meant simply that a large. majority of the votes which created the 
lejjislature were cast by people from Missouri. 

Mr. Toombs. That is what I stated to be the gentleman's position. Then I am not 
mistaken in asserting that the senator set forth before the country, in an elaborate re- 
port, the_ position that the present government of Kansas was ag-ainst the will of the 
people of Kansas ; that a large majority of those people were opposed te the laws en- 
acted by the legislature ; that a majority wanted the Topeka Constitution ; that the ma- 
jority had been invaded, overridden, trampled under foot, ravished, plundered, imprisoned, 
murdered — as we have heard to day. I did not believe a word of all this.' I did not 
think those who said them believed them. I intended to apply a test to them which 
would show whether those senators would act as all reasonable men woftld who believed 
their statements; or whether I was sust<ained in my opinion of their objects, viev/s, and 
purposes. J submit that point to the American people and the world. The senator from 
Massachusetts, now absent from his seat, [Mr. Scmker,] told very much the same story. 
He spoke of down-trodden Kansas, overridden Kansas, plundered Kansas. He told us 
that her people had, by a foreign invasion, been deprived of the right which had been 
promised them — of being allowed to select their own institutions for themselves. How- 
ever variously ramified, enlarged, painted, or bedaubed, this was the basis, the corner- 
stone, upon which were built all of their preten^^ied grievances — all of their frantic agonies. 

If these things were true, they demanded redress; but the facts being controverted, 
the first step towards any just measure of redress would be to ascertain the facts — to 
learn the truth, and then to act upon it — to act promptly, efficiently. The measure 
which I proposed was founded on that principle. I sought to ascertain the facts in the 
best possible mode that my own mind could suggest, to the end, that if these alleged 
wrongs were true, to remove them ; and if they were not true, to demonstrate it to the 
thousands of honest men in the republic who have been deceived and deluded by false- 
hoods concocted in the Territory, and daily transmitted to the public through congres- 
sional speeches and reports, in order to conceal the base metal under the cover ofoflicial 
sanction. 

I came forward to offer it, not in a spirit of compromise, a^ I said to the senator from 
New York, but in vindication of a principle. I offered it on principles which have been 
affirmed by the great body of the American people. I did not expect to satisfy bad 
men on any side. When, four years ago, the present Chief Magistrate was elected — 
and I believe most of these gentlemen voted for him, or his prominent opponent, Gen- 
eral Scott — the people of the United States, with singular unauimity, declared it to be a 
sound fundamental principle that, when the people of a Territory came to be admitted 
into the Union, they should be admitted with or without slavery, as the hona fide in- 
habitants should determine. This was affirmed at Baltimore by the democratic and 
whig parties; it was affirmed by nineteen-twentieths of the American people. Then, 
without going into controverted questions, as these gentlemen demanded what the de- 
mocrats and whigs declared to be correct — as they demanded what I held to be the 
true principle — I felt ready at any moment to grant it. But what did I require? Sim- 
ply that the fact upon which it all turned should be truly ascertained. I said: "Gen- 
tlemen — you the senators from New York, you the senators from Massachusetts, you the 
senators from Vermont — (whom I had long known, and thought I could safely rely upon 
for a fair judgment) — if you say the voice of Kansas is for a free State, take what I 
offer; I present you a proposition to let her have her own free choice forever. If you 
ha.ve spoken truly for her, why do you not take the coveted prize? 

When I make the annunciation, that I am willing to surrender Kansas precisK?ly in 
conformity with the will of the nation — in conformity with your own declarations, how 
am I met? I offer you a pure and undefiled ballot-box. I protect it by all the iv.eans 
which law, backed by force, can give it. I offer the entire military force of this great 
country to secure to you that inestimable privilege — a free untrammelled, and uncon- 
trolled ballot-bos. Hnw am I met? In~fc:id of a pure ballot-box, the senator from 
Massaehusetts and the senator from New York tender me the cartridge-bos. Mr. Presi- • 



16 

dent, if I believed tbose gentlemen represented the North, I would accept it and with' 
draw my bill now. If I b'elievtd the people of the free States were ready for that issue, 
before God and my country I would not shrink from it. I am content to accept it when- 
ever the North offers it. I present no compromises; I present principles; but I do not 
know what claim either of those gentlemen has to speak for the North. I see around 
me able, patriotic, and venerable statesmen — some of whom have for fifty years, in peace 
and in war, been honored and trusted by the North, by the South, by mankind. They 
j^^ive me a different account of the North. The representatives of millions of northern 
freemen, from every State, county, and town in the non-slaveholding States, met in 
council with their countrymen of the South four short weeks ago. I consider them better 
witnesses of the feelings and wishes of the North than the black republican and abolition 
senators on this floor. In regard to the senator from New York, to my knowledge, for 
the last ten years, all parties have dreaded nothing he would do or say so much as the 
odium of his alliance. I deny their right to speak for the North. 

* * * a- ->■ ->r * 7^ * * 

We next call your special attention to the following extracts from 
speeches delivered in the Senate on the 9th of July, pending the 
question on General Cass' motion to print twenty thousand copies of 
the Senate bill for circulation. They are selected in the order in 
which they were delivered, and will serve still further to illustrate 
tiie noble and just position of the democracy, as well as the inconsist- 
encies and absurdities indulged in by the opponents of the bill : 

Mr. ToucKT. Mr. President, the House of Representatives has passed a bill for the 
admission of Kangas into the Union upon the so-called Topeka constitution. The Senate, 
not satisfied with that pretended constitution, on the ground that it was a mere partial 
revolutionary movement — that it was against law — that it was adopted by only a portion 
«f a part^ which had no power to act for the people of Kansas, or to impose on them a 
constitution, have submitted a proposition and passed it, by which the question shall be 
submitted to the bonajide settlers of Kansas, and a constitution formed, if they see fit io 
form one. The bill which was passed by the House of Representatives, and sent to the ' 
Senate, has been amended by substituting the bill of the Senate, and sending that to the 
House; so that the issue is made between the majority of the Senate and the majority of 
the House of Representatives, upon one point only — namely: whether a constitution 
fairly formed by the whole people of Kansas, in the manner provided by the Senate's bill, 
is to be preferred over the revolutionary constitution which was attempted to be made at 
the Topeka convention. 

Now, sir, I desire that this bill of the Senate — which is so just and fair in itself— which 
provides against every evil, so far as 1 can judge, that has been complained of— may be 
spread before the country in the fullest manner for the information of the public; and I 
know of no mode in which it can be done so effectively as by sending out the bill itself 
without note or comment. Let the people judge, from an inspection of the bill itself, 
whether we ought to hare adopted it — whether we, v,ho originally proposed to leave the 
whole subject of their domestic institutions to the people of Kansas, intend to carry out 
that measure in good faith. For one I v/es committed to that measure at the outset, and 
I intended that the people of Kansas, fairly and freely, without any external interference 
from any quarter, sh&uld, as every State does, and as every community has been accus- 
tomed to do iVoui the first settlement of this country down to the present time — exercise 
the right of self-government, and decide for itself upon its own domestic laws and institu- 
tions. 

Sir, I wish to appeal to the people of the country, by the bill which wo have presented, 
and now again present to the House of Representatives, both as an original proposition, 
and as an amendment to their bill — whether we do not now propose to carry out that 
doctrine fairly and tiuly as we avowed? I desire no better vindication of my course 
than that the people shall read this bill. There was only one objection to it, and that 
was the want of numbers; but the House of Representatives has waived that objection, 
and we have waived it. We do so on the ground of the difficulties now existing in 
Kansas, and we apply a remedy. That remedy is, by the action of the bona fide settlers, 
forming a constitution for themselves without exrernal interference, and we mean to up- 
hold them in their right to form the-ir own constitution, aud to establish their own do- 



17 

inestic institutions, as every State in the Union now does, and lias hitherto been accus- 
tomed to do. 

As I said before, I wish this bill to go to the American people. It has been misrepre- 
sented; it is nov/ grossly misrepresented. Instead of taking the misrepresentation, I 
wish the bill to go to the people, that they may see what it ia, and that intelligent men 
everywhere may understand what it is. 

Mr. Fessicnden. Will the honorable senator allow me to ask him in what particular it 
has been misrepresented? 

Mr. ToccEY. Misrepresented, sir! It is represented as a mere slave measure; it is 
represented a,s an unfair measure; it is denounced and misrepresented as designed for 
other purposes than to secure to the hona fide settlers of the Territory the right of self- 
government; and there are thousands who will never know, until it is too late, what is 
the true character of this bill and what are ita provisions. I desire that the bill may go 
before the people at the north, and throughont the vvhole north, that they may see and 
know v.'ho they are v.-ho are disposed to leave it to the people of the Territory to govern 
themselves, to make their own lav/s, to establish their own institutions, and who propose 
a diS'erent and an opposite course. * * * ■;:■ * * 

Mr. WicLt-Ki;. I do not desire to engage in the discussion of the merits of the bill; I 
only wish to say a word in regard to the publication of it. I am very glad to find that 
the senators from Ohio and Massachusetts are v/iliing to print twenty thousand extra 
copies of the bill in order that the people may understasd precisely the position which 
the majority of the Senate occupy on this question. The senator from Massachusetts 
certainly must know that this bill has been shamefully misrepresented — I do not say by 
ftny senators here, but by the public press of the country — and I am satisfied from what 
I have seen, that there are really some very intelligent editors in the country who do not 
comprehend this question, who do not understand this bill as it has been passed by the 
Senate. Why, sir, the misrepresentntions of the public press are of such a character 
that no public man dare now go before an assembly and read a newspaper as authority. 
I grant you, this bill will be published in the newspapers; but where will you findapnb- 
lic man who will risk his reputation by reading a newspaper as authority to 'sustain any 
fact which he may aflirm? I know that in the State of Ohio no public speaker dare 
allude to a newspaper as authority for any statement he may make. Therefore it is that 
^Z desire to get this bill in an ofdcial form. It will theu be a document which cannot be 
controverted. The public press very oftnn misrepresents senators. They have even gone 
80 far as to say that the senator from Massachusetts the other day, in a public speech 
v;l>ich he made in the city of Philadelphia, declared that Mr. Buchanan had affirmed 
that, if he had a drop of democratic blood in his veins, he would let it out. Now I am 
sure that it is a misrepresentation of the public press. The senator from Massachusetts 
is an intelligent man, and never could have uttered any thing so destitute of truth as 
that. 

I only allude to this to show the misrepresentations of the public press, not only as to 
public men, but as to public measures. We desire, on this side of the chamber, that our 
position shall be understood. Let the people read the bill, and my word for it they will 
never give snch a construction to it as has been given to it by the senator from Ohio, 
(Mr. Wade.) At all events, let it go out. We shall meet them at the ballot box; we 
s-hall argue this question there;, and if the judgment of the people be against it, we shall 
submit. We shall not threaten revolution, as some of the leading newspapers on that 
side have done. We shall not threaten force and violence. We shall threaten another 
appeal to the ballot box at nome other time. 

Mr. BiGLER. Mr. President, I have listened to the remarks of the senator from Massa- 
chusetts with surpi-ise. He has gravely inquired for the time and occasion when the bill 
(which it is proposed to print) was misrepresented. Why, sir, there can be no difficulty 
in answering that question. He has done so himself. Immediately after making the in- 
quiry, the honorable senator asserted, with great earnertress of manner, that the inten- 
tion 'and purpose of the bill is to carry put the work already commenced by the_^ border 
ruffians of Missouri! Will the senator say that such statements are not a palpable mis- 
representation of the measure? Will he pretend that the language of the proposed law 
justifies any such conclusion? What feature of the act has brought the senator to the 
belief, that the intention is to carry on the work of usurpation, fraud, arson, and murder, 
which he has told us has been begun in Kansas? What language in the bill looks to a 
•work of that kind — that justifies, invites, or countenances it to the slightest extent? 

Now, sir, when this measure was fir.1t under consideration, the senator made a state- 
ment similar to that v.'hich he has dropped this morning. He then said the intention 



18 

•was-^o brin^ Kansas info tbe Uuion as a slave State. Will not such statements be 
picked up by the press in his part of the Union, for the purpose of creating the impres- 
sion that there is some hidden purpose in the bill calculated to do injustice to a portion 
of the people of Kansas? And yet the senator manifests surprise that misrepresentations 
should he anticipated. 

Now, sir, I assert, unqualifiedly, that the bill intends no such purpose as that imputed 
to it by the senator from Massachusetts; and I ask him to point to the section or clause 
that justifies his assertion. Its language and purpose are elear, so much so, that the 
\Tayfaring man cannot misunderstand it. It simply intends that the people — the bona 
fide citizens, now in Kansas, shall, by the expression of their will, uncontrolled, decide 
the question of slavery for themselves — shall determine whether they will have the insti- 
tution or not. Is this not fair? Have we not been told by both sides, that they ask 
iiothing more? Is not this in accordance with the spirit of the organic law? 

But we are next told by the senator from Ohio, that if a little more time had been 
given for the organization of the State under the bill, it would have been more accepta 
ble. Tkis is extraordinary logic to come from those who insist upon the admission ot 
Kansas, immediately, on the Topeka constitution ; a measure adopted when the popula- 
tion was far less than at present, and which, on the face of the proceedings connected 
with it, only purports to come from a portion of the people — those not content with the 
territorial government. Again, he alleges that a certain class of the inhabitants have 
been driven out. The honorable senator is certainly aware that the eleventh section of 
the bill, as passed by the Senate, m.akes a provision, that all those who at any time had 
been citizens of the Territory, and had left, temporarily, because of the bad condition 
of society, or for any other reason, shall have the right to return and participate in the 
election. 

Mr. Wade. Does this bill give any additional right to the people to return there ? 
Have they not a right to go there whether your bill passes or not? Is there anything 
gained by it ? 

Mr. BiGLER. Certainly the people can return to the Territory, whether the bill passes 
or not ; but that is Hot the point. The senator knows that the 4th day of July, 1856, is 
named as the time when the bill shall take effect. Those who are citizens at that time 
are to have the right to vote for delegates. The senator, and those acting with him, 
objected to this feature, alleging that the free State party had been driven out of the 
Territory, and therefore the tendency was to make Kansas a slave State. This objection 
■was promptly met by a provision from the committee, which I have just described, that 
aH who had left could return and participate in forming a State government. The com- 
missioners appointed to superintend the election are directed to enter the names of all 
such on the list, and permit them to vote for delegates ; so that all the qualified %-otors 
■who were in the Territory at the time the Topeka Constitution was made, and all who 
have at any time made their residence there up to the 4th of July, 1856, will have a part 
in making the constitution. Surely, Mr. President, no man who advocates the Topeka 
constitutfon can consistently object to this bill on the ground that all the citizens are 
not to participate in carrying out its provisions. Any objection to the Senate bill on that 
point will apply with destructive force to the Topeka movement. 

It is most extraordinary, Mr. President, that we should be lectured — no, I will not say 
lectured — but edified from the other side, on the necessity of order and form in our 
movements — that we should not attempt suddenly to force a measure on the country 
which is not intended to accomplish the end which appears on its face, and at the same 
time be urged to sanction the Topeka constitution, a step which all must agree ■was 
taken, not only without authority of law, but in derogation of all law, and which pro- 
gressed in menace of the government, at every step, and which has been marked by 
violence and disorder in every stage of its emanation. 

N/3W, sir, I wish to say to the senators from Massachusetts and Ohio, very distinctly, 
that when they describe the tendencies of the bill as forcing slavery into the Territory, 
and as perpetuating the work of the border rulfians — if they mean to say that I seek to 
produce such consequences, they misrepresent my motives. I simply intend that the 
honct Jidc citizens of Kansas f^liall, without dictation from any quarter, decide the question 
of slavery for themselves. This is all the bill intends, or is calculated to produce. I have 
liked this measure from the beginning, because I thought it contained the elements of 
peace and quiet, together with those of perfect fairness to all ; its leading idea being the 
prompt termination of the contest as to the local policy of the Territory touching the 
institution of slavery. We have been tuld l.>y the other side that there was no remedy 



19 

for (lie state of society in Kansas but her prompt admission into the Union as a State, 
and this is what the bill provides for. We have been told, also, by these gentlemen, that 
they had no confidence in the local government of Kansas— that it was controlled by 
the sliive power entirely — that free State people were driven from the polls. In order to 




iple power to pro- 
tect the ballot-box against aggressions from Missouri or any other quarter. They can 
even call in the aid of the military to accomplish this end. Now, sir, I am not to be 
misunderstood on this subject of intrusions from Missouri. I countenance no such. 
I have uniformly discarded and condemned them. I seek only a fair and free expression 
of popular will. 

But we have been exultingly told that we have abandoned the doctrine of non-inter 
vention by the bill. I do not intend to argue this point at length. The senator from 
Michigan, when the bill was under consideration put that allegation down. I certainly 
do not intend to impair the doctrine by any act of mine, for I intend it shall be a iinality 
on this subject. But 1 can see a very clear distinction between annulling laws clearly 
Hnconstitutional, and in violation of the letter and spirit of the organic act, and a law 
of Congress dictating or interdicting a local institution — saying that the people should 
or should not sell ardent spirits — that they should or should not hold slaves. It should 
be observed, again, that the proposed action has special reference to the preparation of 
Kansas tor admission as a State, and not to her policy as a Territory, I am aware, Mr. 
President, that some features of the bill look like interference; but the Kansas-Nebraska 
act declares that the action of the local legislature shall be confined to rightful subjects 
of legislation. Will it be pretended, then, that interfering with the right of free discus 
sion is a rightful subject of legislation ? I do not care to raise the question of congres- 
sional power, for I hold that, however the question may be decided, it is politic for Con- 
gress not to exercise the right to interfere with the question of slavery in the Territories. 



In conclusion, Mr. President, I wish to repeat that the vitality of this bill is found in 
that feature which so promptly terminates all motive, on the part of outsiders, to force a 
temporary population into the Territory for the purpose of shaping its policy on the 
subject of slavery. So soon, then, as the bill shall become a law, that feature will take 
effect. Thereafter it will be idle for the advocates of slavery on the one hand, and the 
enemies of the ius'itution on the other, not residents, to continue their efforts and excite- 
ment. I seek to adopt a measure of peace: and much as I dislike the precedent for the 
admission of States with very small population, I am willing to forego this, because I 
think the exigoncies demand extraordinary measures. But I cannot vote for the admis- 
sion of Kansas on the Topeka constitution. It would be the recognition of violence — of 
usurpation, and because it would be unjust to a portion of the people — would countenance 
revolution, attempted without any previous application for redress — for the Topeka con- 
vention took the subject into their own hands, without asking redress at the hands of 
Congress at all. Both sides have invited the proposed measure by seeking early admis- 
sion into the Union, and I have no fear of the result; the provisions of the bill will ba 
embraced. The senator from Massachusetts [Mr. Wilson] has said that the consequences 
will be to bring Kansas in as a slave State ; and yet that senator has uniformly claimed, 
as have all on the other side, that three fourths or nine tenths of the people of Kansas 
are for a free State, and I have shown that all who may have left have the opportunity 
to return. Up to the introduction of this bill we have been told by the other side that all 
they desired was a fair expression of the will of the people. This bill will afford an op- 
portunity for such expression, and those who oppose it must take the responsibility. I 
shall vote for the motion to print. 

Mr. Douglas. I shall not detain the Senate long. The excuse heretofore given for 
resisting the law and shooting\lown the officers of the'Iaw in Kansas, has been that the 
same legislature which made the Kansas code passed two or three statutes which the 
resistants did not like — statutes invading the liberty of the firess and the freedom ol 
speech, and imposing certain tests for voting and for jurors. It was said that these par 
ticular laws were barbarous and monstrous — that a free people should not submit to 
them, and that, whilst such laws stood on the statute book, they were justified in resisting 
the constituted authorities of the Territory. Well, sir, the Senate has passed a bill 



20 

wKtcli declares all such obnoxious provisions or laws in the Territory null and void. 
Kvery statutory provision which hus been irivea as an excuse for resistance to laws, has 
been blotted out. What excuse now have you for getting up rebellion, and- riots, and 
bloodshed, and house-burain;j,-3 in Kansas? If now you resist the law, you are resistinj^ 
statutes that are acknowled<red to be proper and wise — those v.'hich punish murder, and 
house-breaking, and robbery, and those crimes that are punished, and ought to be pun- 
ished, in all civilized communities. What excuse have you now for resistance to ths 
law? iJu you say that the murderer should not be punished, because you do not believe 
that the legislature was fairly elected which made the law against murder ? Are you 
gfiiug to rescue the thief because you do not like the legislature that passed the law 
against larceny? The obnoxious laws are gone, and the seiuUor from Ohio [Mr. Wade] 
lauients that they are gone. He laments it in his speech, and I have no doubt laments 
it in his heart. The material out of which political capital is to ba made is gone. 

Gentlemen have been kind enough to say that the olsject of this bill is to maice a slave 
State in Kansas. I show them that by the provisions of the bill its object is to allow 
the people to make just such a State as they wish. The Senator from Maine (Mr. 
Fessenden) says he has a right to go a little behind the face of the bill, and give his 
opinion that the object is to make Kansas a slave State. Conceding that right, and 
acting upon it, I have a right to come to the conclusion, that all these gentlemen want 
is to get up murder and blomlshed in Kansas for political effect. They do not mean 
that there shall be peace until afeer the Presidential election. They sent their partisan 
agents to get up rebelion, to commit crime, to burn houses, and then their newspapei' 
agents are to report these acts here, and charge them on the border rutfians. This 
whole game of violence there, and the publication of it here, is done by the one and 
same set of men — done for political effect. It is a part of their game. They do not 
mean that there shall be peace. Their capital for the Presidential election is blood. 
We may as well talk plainly. An angel from heaven could not write a bill to restore 
peace in Kansas that would be acceptable to the Abolition Republican party previous 
to the Presidential election (Laughter and applause in the galleries.) 

The Presiding Officer, (Mr. Foot,) order. 

Mr. DouGLA.!^. The Senate has passed and now propose to print a bill no m.an on earth 
can pretend is not fair, just, and equitable in all its provisions. Even the most hardened 
partisan does not pretend to say the bill is unfair. Then why not go for it? They say 
there is something beyond it. The Senator from Vermont (Mr. Collamer) says he must 
look at the cause of the difficulty, in order to provide the remedy. But if this bill is a 
fair one; if its provisions are such as will insure a true expression of the popular 
voic-c of Kansas, why not agtee to it? ^Fon say you do not like the cause that produced 
the difficulty in Kansas. Nor do we. We believe that you originated all the ditliculties, 
and are justly responsible for the consequences; we believe your Emigrant Aid Society 
was organized for such purposes. We believe there never v/ould have been any trouble 
iu Kansas but for your efforts, and that they were for political objects. Still, you have 
brought these difficulties upon Kansas, and we have to deal with the facts as they are. 
We have to deal with existing facts. Shall we refuse to remedy the evils because we 
feel and know that you proiuced them ; or will you refuse to remedy the evils because 
y<i\i charge the origin of them on us? We are bound as honest men and patriots to 
apply a remedy to the evils, no matter from what quarter they may have originated. 

Then, sir, if it be an evil to have laws in force infringing the freedom of speech in the 
Territory, why not join with us to pass this bill, which obliterates those laws? If it be 
an evil of such magnitude as to justify rebellion and bloodshed to have the test oaths in 
the Territory, why not join with us in blotting them out? If there be such evils as are 
portrayed in Kansas, why not join us in applying the remedy? No; you vainly hope 
that you can make the people believe that the Democracy are responsible for the conse- 
quences of your own acts, and thus gather political capital from the blood of your fellow- 
citizens, if violence can reign and the excitement last until the Presidential election. 
Hence, law must not prevail — life mu:jt not be sate — property must not be secure — peace 
must not be restored in Kansas, if the Abolition Repubiicaji leaders can prevent it until 
afier the election. You mistake, if you suppose the people will not be able to under- 
stand this scheme. 

When we present you with a fair bill designed and calculated to have a fair electioi}, 
if you are v.-ilHu^r that there should be a fair election, why not join us in passing the 
bill ? Your excuse is, that the free State men have all left Kansas, and that there is no 
hop(! or expectation that they ever will return. If, for the sake of the argument, the 
truth of this position should be granted, would that fact famish sufficient reason for 



21 

denying to the actual inhabitants of Kansas — those who intend to remain and make it 
their home — the riglit of livin|r under a constitution and laws of their own making? 
By the terras of the bill, all who have left have the ri^rht to return and vote at the elee- 
tion. If they do not return and make Kansas their home, and vote at the election, it 
will be their own fault or choice. But is it true, in fact, that the great body of the free 
State men have left Kansas? If they have, and if it be true that they will not go back, 
do you propose to give effect to a constitution which they made, and to which they will 
not return and live under ? If your statement be true that they have all left, you have 
got a constitution which nobody in the Territory is in favor of — a constitution to govern 
a people, all of whom are against it — a constitution in the making of whicli nobody 
there participated. If your statement be true that those who made the Topeka constitu- 
tion have left and gone to parts unknown, and cannot be induced to return, with what 
propriety or truth can you say that the constitution ought to govern a people who are 
opposed to it, and had no voice in making it? But why talk about the free State men, 
or any considerable portion of them, having been driven from the Territory? If the 
newspapers are to be believed, a few have left on both sides, and probably in about equal 
proportions in respect to numbers. 



Then, I ask, what cause of complaint is there, that the free State men have left the 
Territory ? How long is it since this cry has been raised ? The whistle was sounded 
by the leader (Mr. Seward,) and every one repeated it like a parrot. Up to the moment 
this bill was submitted to them — up to that very instant of the time — the leader said, and 
every one repeated it, that the free State men were in the ratio of ten or twenty to one 
to the pro-slavery men of Kansas. You all affirmed the statement, and repeated it over 
and over again in your speeches, as a reason why Kansas should be admitted with the 
Topeka constitution. You all averred that the Topeka party comprised a vast majority 
of the inhabitants of Kansas — some of you stating that a majority ten to one, while 
others estimated it at twenty to one ; but all agreeing that there was an overwhelming 
majority in favor of a free State, and for that reason, insisted upon the admission of 
Ka!isas with the Topeka constitution. You affirmed the truth of this fact up to the very 
hour that the Senatiir from Georgia gave notice of his proposition to ascertain, by a fair 
election, the real opinions and wishes of the people of Kansas, when suddenly you all 
changed your tune, and declared that such a law would result inevitably in making 
Kansas a s!«ve State. How could such a bill make Kansas a slave State, if a majority 
of the people were opposed it? It is admitted on all hands that the bill is just and 
equitable in all its provisions, and provides for a fair and impartial election. Your argu- 
ment was, that Kansas should be permitted to speak ; that her voice shoidd be heard ; 
her will obeyed, by allowing her people to have such a constitution as nineteen twentieths 
of them demanded. You said it was a great crime against Kansas, to compel the ma- 
jority to submit to the minority; that a free people would not submit, and ought never 
to submit, tj a system of laws forced upon them in opposition to their wishes, and 
regardless of their rights under the organic law to decide the slavery question for them- 
selves. 

Now, when we propose to permit Kansas to speak, and to speak her own voice, unin- 
fluenced and unawed by any foreign power, or any other power than their own free will, 
your excuse for denying them the right of making their own fundamental law, is that 
your friends have been driven out, or they are imprisoned! Imprisoned! for what? 
You give us to understand that they are all in prison for violating the law abridging the 
freedom of speech and of the press. Bear in mind — and I have had to remind you of 
it several times this session — there has never beeti one of your men imprisoned for a 
violation of either one of the obnoxious laws of which you have complained. If it be 
true, as is now said, that they are in prison, and under arrest for a violation of any one 
of those laws, this bill abrogates those laws, and thus releases your prisoners. There is 
no lawyer who will deny that a bill repealing a penal law without a reservation as to 
pre-existins offences, dismisses the indictment, and releases the prisoner. It is a 
general jail delivery of the whole Territory as to any crime or alleged offence under any 
one of those obnoxious laws which you say ought not to be in force. Then what comes 
of your complaint that your men are all in prison? If they are in prison, they are not 
there for violating any one of those obnoxious laws. If they are in prison, they are 
there for larceny, for murder, for robbery, or for some other crime, punishment for which 
is usual and proper in all civilized communities. They are not in prison for violating 
any law abridging the freedom of speech, or the liberty of the press, or any other right 



22 

heW saered in any Christian country. I repeat that all laws of which you complala 
have been declared null and void, as being contrary to the true intent and rueaiving of 
the organic law, and the Constitution of the United States. 

Then what becomes of your objections to this bill? You are driven back to the flimsy 
pretext that it is a bill to make Kansas a slave State, and is so designed — yes, " designed" 
is the word. The b.ll provides Chat it shall be a free State, if there are a majority of 
the people for making it a free State, and a slave State, if a majority are in favor of its 
being a slave State; yet you say it is a bill to make Kansas a slave State. This allega- 
tion cannot be true, and yon cannot believe it to be true, unless a majority of the ho)ui 
fide inhabitants are opposed to the Topeka constitution, and in favor of making Kansas 
a slave State. Do you pretend that there is a majority there in favor of a slave State? 
If a majority of the bona fide inhabitants are in favor of a slave State, they have the 
right to make it so ; and it is our duty to receive it into the Union either with or without 
slavery, as they shall determine. The will of that people fairly expressed, honestly em- 
bodied in their constitution, ought to be the fundamental law of the new State. 



I have a word to say on the subject of popular sovereignty, inasmuch as the gentle* 
man from New Hampshire has brought it into the debate. He certainly could not have 
been here the other night, or else he is very forgetful, when he says the doctrine is now 
abandoned — that the legislature of a territory has the right to legislate on the subject of 
sJavery, in obedience to the Constitution. Did not the senator from Michigan [Mr. 
Cass] affirm that right in debate the other night? Did not the senator from Connecticut 
[Mr. Toucey] vindicate that right in the same debate ? 

Did not the senator from Ohio [Mr. Pughj avow and defend the same doctrine ? Did 
1 not do the same thing in that debate, in language so explicit and unequivocal that no 
man can be excused for misunderstanding? Did not every senator on this side of the 
chamber, without one exception, who spoke on the subject, distinctly avow and defend 
\he same doctrine ? And yet, in the face of all the.se avowals in the last debate which 
has occurred on the subject, we are told by the senator from New Hampshi-re [Mr. Hale] 
tliat the doctrine is abandoned. Abandoned I when, and by whom ? Certainly not by its 
advocates. The doctrine was unanimously affirmed by the National Democratic Convention 
at Cincinnati, and now forms a fundamental article in the creed of the party as officially 
promulgated. This is all I have to say upon that point. The senator says he is in 
favor of popular sovereignty so far as to allow the people of each Territory to decide the 
s-iavery question for themselves when they form a constitution preparatory, to their 
admission into the Union. I am glad to hear this avowal. I am sure it will astonish 
his political associates as much as it does his opponents. He complains that I should 
have intimated that he and his political friends were opposed to allowing the people to 
decide the question for themselves when they seek admission into the Union. I did sup- 
pose that the unanimous and determined opposition of the whole abolition party, includ 
iug the senator himself, to the bill under consideration, justified such a declaration. 

Tlie whole object of the "bill is to protect the people of Kansas in 
tlie undisturbed exercise of their right to form a constitution to suifc 
themselves, and to come into the Union with slavery, or without it, 
as they shall determine in their constitution. If he and his i)artj 
really believe in the doctrine which he now avows, he and they are 
bound to vote for the bill under discussion. Sir, if he is in favor of 
allowing each State to come into the Union with or without slavery, 
as it pleases, he belongs to a political party whose creed declares "^ no 
more slave States" in this Union under any circumstances. Your 
party is pledged never, " as long as the sun shall shine, or water shall 
run, or grass grow," to admit another slave State into this Union, 
whether the people want slavery or not. Is not that the position of 
your [)arty ? 

You run a candidate pledged to do an act which you deem it unfair 
and unjust for us to charge on yourselves. You belong to and co- 
operate with a party unanimously pledged to do an act which you 



23 

admit to be unponstitutional. Your party stands pledged, hy erery 
obligation which can bind men's honor, never to admit any more 
slave States, while yon declare on tlie floor of the Senate that every 
new State has a riglit to come into the Union with or without slavery, 
as its own people shall determine for themselves. If you liold the 
sentiments which you now declare, you cannot and dare not vote for 
the Kepublican ticket, which is pledged against that very principle ; 
nor could you be in favor of the restoration of the Missouri restriction, 
v.'hicli prohibited slavery, not only while a Territory, but "forever," 
in the country over which it extended. So much for the views of 'the 
senator from New Hampshire on popular sovereignty ! 

But the senator says I have charged him with certain crimes, and 
he is grieved that I should have supposed he could be guilty of such 
grave offences. The charge consists in my having held him responsi- 
ble for the natural consequences of every speech he has made in Con- 
gress during this session, if not for several years past. We were told 
yestei'day, by the same senator, that it v/as but fair and legitimate to 
hold a senator responsible for the natural consequences of his own 
acts. Here is what he said: 

"The senator from Illinois complains that it has been represented that there was an 
intention, a desire, a piirpose, by the legislation of (Jongreas, to make Kansas a slave 
State. Mr. President, I have been educated to believe in the wisdom of that rcaxim of 
the common law which says that a man intends the natural consequences of his act. It 
is not for a man to take a gun and fire into a-crowd, and say he did not rr.eaa to hurt 
anybody. The law says he intended the natural consequences of bis act." 

Following that line of argument, the senator assumed the responsi- 
bility of charging me with the personal intention of creating a slave 
State in Kansas in direct contradiction to mj own language on this 
floor. He had heard me deny that such was the intention of the hill, 
or of those who voted for it. He had heard me declare that the inten- 
tion was to leave the people there free to form a slave State or a free 
State, as they should see proper ; but in the teeth of my declaration, 
and in direct opposition to the terms of the bill, he took upon himself 
to charge me with an intent to do what he thought would be the re- 
sult of the act. jSTow, when I, in turn, apply his own process of rea- 
soning to him, and prove that if his reasoning be true he is guilty of 
every crime that has disgraced humanity in Kansas, he objects to the 
application of the rule. He is not willing to be held responsible for 
the natural consequences of his own action. He is not willing to be 
judged by the same rule which he professes to be fair when applied to 
others. Yet he must submit to the application of that rule to himself, 
or withdraw all he ha,s said against us. 

The senator from Maine, this morning, repeated the same declara- 
tion of his belief; so did the senator from Massachusetts. Do they 
expect that we will allow them to attribute designs to us in direct 
contradiction of our express language, and we refrain from holding 
them responsible before God and man for all the life that is taken, 
and the blood which is shed in pursuance of the line of policy they 
have worked out for the presidential campaign ? 

Wfe show them that their intentions may be questioned, and n\o- 



24 

tives impugned, as "Well as ours. This system of Tlolp4,tuig all the 
rules and usages of debate by impeaching senators' intentions, con- 
trary to their declaration^ they will find is not a pleasant business, I 
have never impugned a senator's motive except in self-defence^ or just 
retaliation. In this sense I do say, without the least hesitation, that 
every crime committed in Kansas, every act of violence p)erpetrated in 
the Territory, has resulted naturally as the legitimate consequence of 
the speeches and action of the free-soil senators in this chamber. In 
your speeches you have told the people of Kansas that the legislature 
was an unlawful assemblage ; that their enactments were not valid 
laws ; that the people were under no obligation, moral or legal, to 
obey the local laws of the Territory ; that the officers a,ppointed to 
execute the laws had no rightful authority to do so ; and that both 
officers and the laws might be resisted, even unto death, without in- 
curring any responsibility or punishment. 

That is the fair construction of every speech you have made. "5fon 
have, by your speeches, advised bloody resistance to the law and its 
officers. You now complain that, in making that resistance, blood 
has been shed and life has beeij taken. If so, the blood has been shed 
and the life taken under your direct advice ; it is the legitimate con- 
sequence of your own acts. Then, when I charge upon you as a party 
all the consequences of those bloody acts which have stained the his- 
tory of Kansas, I only charge that which is and was the inevitable 
consequence of the speeches you have made and the course you have 
pursued. 

Mr. FESSENDEI^. Will the Senator state who has made any 
speech advising bloody resistance? I am not aware of any such. I 
liPcve made no speech on the subject myself, and therefore the remark 
does not apply to me ; but I have not heard any speeches of the kind. 

Mr. DOUCtLAS. Each one of the speeches v/hich I have heard 
from your side of the Chamber has been calculated to encourage and 
excite resistance to the laws of the Territory. 

Mr. FESSEK DEN. That is your inference from the speeches. 

Mr. DOUGLAS. Yes; and it must have been the inference, also, 
of every impartial man who has listened to the debates. Denuncia- 
tions of the legislature of the Territory, and of its enactments, and 
of the officers of the law, together with eulogies upon the heroic 
people of Lawrence, and j^raises of the gallant free State party, have 
constituted the materials out of which nearly all of your speeches have 
been manufactured. The fact can neither be denied nor concealed, 
that the tendency of all such speeches was to stimulate and encourage 
rebellion against the laws, and resistance to the officers of the Terri- 
tory. No crime has been perpetrated, no act of violence committed, 
which cannot find its justification in the speeches of senators. It is 
difficult to conceive for what purpose those speeches were made, unless 
it Wcis 14 excite resistance to the laws of the Territory, and to con- 
vince the people of the United States that those laws ought to be 
Euccessfully resisted. Thus you all counselled violence; and violence 
resulted from your counsels. It afiords m.c no pleasure to speak in 



25 

terms of severity of senat-ojs ; but it is time tliey learned that tliey 
cannot assault me, or question my motives, with impunity. 

Mr. President, the senator from New Hampshire has spoken of that great landmark 
of freedom, the Missouri compromise, which was so sacred that the denunciations of the 
Bible would rest upon any man who had ever committed the profane act of assisting ia 
its removal. While the senator was pouring forth his eloquent denunciations on the 
beads of those who have removed the landm.ark, I sent one of the pages to get me a copy 
of a speech made by that senator during the discussions of the Compromise measures of 
1850. I have the speech before me, and I will read what he then said of the Missouri 
compromise, and see how far it sustains the sacred character which he now attributes to 
ihat measure : 

"Mr. Hale. I wish to say a word as a reason why I shall vote against the amend- 
ment. I shall vote against 38° 30' because I think tJiere is an iniplicatioa in if. 
[Laughter.] I will vote for 37° or 3CP either, just as it is convenient ; but it is idle to 
shut our eyes to the flict that here is an attempt in this bill — I will not say it is the 
intention of the mover — to pledge this Senate and Congress to the imaginary line of 
36° 30', because there are some kisiorical recoJleetio)!^ connected with it in regard to this 
controversy about slavery. I will content myself with saying, that I never will, by vote or 
speech, admit or submit to any thing that may bind tJie action of our legislation here to 
make the parallel of?ii'° 3(1' the boundary line betioecn slave and free territory. And 
when I say that, I explain the reason why I go against the amendment.'' 

When the question was presented for consideration whether 36" 30' should be main- 
tained as the dividing line between freedom and slavery, as the senator calls it, he repre- 
sented such a dividing line as the worst of all modes of settlement that could be devised. 
Then he told us with eloquent totigue, and in bold language, appealing to God f r the 
sincerity of his vow, that never would he, by act or speech, recognize the propriety of 
the line of 3o° 30'. Now, when he thinks he can make a point on a political opponent, 
he speaks of that great covenant of peace, 3(j° 30', and of the terrible condemnation 
threatened by Divine authority on men who remove the landmark, referring to 3G° 30', 
as a sacred monument between freedom and slavery. I ask him now, if he does not 
tremble lest the jud;:ment of that just God, whose vengeance he has implored on us, will 
rest upon himself, for having first derided that measure, which for partisan purposes he 
now calls sacred? It does not become the senE^tor from New Hampshire to arraign me 
for having abrogated the line 36" 30'. 

AVliile speaking of the territorial laws, condemning many of them, 
and conceding abuses in the elections for members of the legislature, 
]\Ir. Stuart, of Michigan, presented the following views as to the bind- 
ing efiect of the statutes, to wit: 

I hold the doctrine in respect to those law.g to be this: laws enacted by a legislature 
elected according to the forms of law, and placed upon a statute book by courts and be 
executive officers throughout this whole country, are to be regarded as binding laws, and 
it is their duty to execute them. It has been decided by the highest tribunals in thy 
States and the United States, that no court can go behind the law to see whether it was 
fairly passed or not, and no executive officer called on to execute the law can be per- 
mitted to determine for himself ita validity. Then, when Senators on this floor have told 
the people of Kansas from this high place that they were justified in resistiug those laws, 
they have told them what courts, acting in obedience to laws and constitutions, have 
determined to be criminal ever .^ince civilization began. And yet they say they are not 
responsible! Men stand here in their places and say to the people of Kansas: "These 
laws have been f jrced on you by the psople of Missouri; they are irregular; they are 
of no binding effect, and you are justified in their resistance;'' and yet they '"wash their 
hands of all the evils that exist in Kansas." 

"When it comes to a congressional question, in my judgment it is quite another affair. 
The authority of Congress put that Territory in a condition to be organized; and if 
Congress are satisfied that that organization has been irregular, fraudulent, and void, 



26 I 

th^' possess the power clearly and beyond dispute to right the evil and afford a remedy. 
Bait, sir, the President of the United States and every executive officer, the Supreme 
Court of the United States andevery judicial officer, is bound to refjard those laws while 
they stand, as the existing bona fide laws of the Territory, and they are to be' obeyed. 

■In reference to the cliaracter of the bill and the objections made to 
it, the same gentleman presented the following cogent remarks': 

It is presented, therefore, in the existing excited condition of the country, and in the 
lamentable condition of Kansas, as the only remedy that it is possible to pass. And 
how is it objected to? Every Senator who has spoken on the other side has acknow- 
ledged that upon its face it is a good bill, and that if it could be carried out according to 
its own terms and provisions, it would execute a good purpose — it would heal the diffi- 
culties in Kansas, and reduce things to order and harmony throughout the country. 
Now, I say to my honorable friends here — opponents as well as those who think with me 
— 4.hat whenever any man ventures opposition to a bill on the ground that it is to be dis- 
honestly executed, it is an argument which subverts the foundation of all law. Human 
ingenuity cannot pass a law which is to be effective, if it is not to be honestly and com- 
pletely executed. If you assume that the courts of the country, the President and the 
executive officers of the country, will not execute your laws, then you may abandon leji^is- 
lation upon this, and upon all other subjects. I go for this bill upon the belief and 
upon the expectation that, like all other laws, it will be honestly executed and carried 
out; and the surrounding circumstances of the country, so far from permitting me to 
leave them as they are, urge me to forgo the personal wishes which my friends know I 
had in respect to some amendments to that bill, and to give it my hearty and my full 
support. 

Mr. Pugh concluded a very able discussion of the whole subject with 
the following cogent and convincing argument in favor of the Senate 
bill: 

The Territory of Kansas is now convulsed by civil war. These Senators themselves 
proclaim the fact. They represent it as worse, much worse, than I have seen reason to 
believe. They tell us that the people — our fellow-citizens — men, women, children — are 
ki a condition of horrible distress. What remedies are proposed? None sir, that can 
be effectual, or satisfactory, except the bill to which the Senate has given its approval. 
Will those senators defeat the bill? Will their partisans in the other House reject it? 
I adjure you to consider the consequences. Do you desire peace in Kansas? Do you 
wish to have a fair election? Do you intend to allow those inhabitants their undoubted 
rights as American citizens? Then assist in the adoption of the Senate bill. There is 
nothinjjelse. If you do not assist — if you defeat that bill — if you prolong the sorrowful 
condi'-Jon of Kansas — if you stimulate this unnatural controversy to greater lengths — 
tHien, I tell you, the curse of every crime which may henceforth be committed there — the 
blood of every man who may be slain — the honor of every woman who may be violated — 
will rise up in judgment against you. I will not now make the charge — although as a re- 
tort, it would be justifiable — that you desire a continuance of this anarchy, public dis- 
tress, and civil wai-, in order that you may influence the results of the presidential eleo- 
tion. That, however, isaquestion for the country at large ; and I shall endeavor, in my 
humble sphere, to make the country understand and appreciate it. 

Here is the substantive proposition: That with all the safeguards suggested in either 
House of Congress, an election is to be held in Kansas — a State government formed — 
and peace happily restored. What is proposed on the other side? First, the senator 
from Illinois [Mr. Trumbull] wishes to abolish all the laws of the Territory at once, and 
thus legitimate the outrages, the bloodshed, the anarchy, which he pretends to deplore. 
Second, he and his political associates offer to subjugate the citizens of the Territory to 
a constitution which they never ratified, which was formed without authority of lav/ — and 
which modestly declares itself unalterable, in any particular for nine years. 

Let the people of the United States consider such an issue — ay, sir, let them (^ccfWc it. 
This involves everything connected with our government, which is worthy of considera- 
tion. If passion, prejudice, fanaticism — aided by all the modern arts and adjuncts of 
falsehood — can so mislead the American people that they will not distinguish good from 
evU-— will no longer respect the fundamental principles of their own government— -wiU 



27 

rashly mutilate tbat sacred compact, the Federal CoxsTi-njrioN', in which all the 
securities of our Uaioa, our peace, our liberty, our happiuess reaide — -it is of little conse- 
quence who may be the next Predidet\t, and whether Congress should ever again assem- 
ble. The experiment of popular institutions will have utterly failed; for, without 
patriotism, intelligence, virtue, and self-command, a popular government must fall into 
confusion atid despotism at last. 

In iiny event, Mr. President, I can do nothing more. I have sacrificed every scruple, 
every minor consideration, to an ardent desire for peace. I have gone to the extremity 
of concession. I have agreed to whatever is honest and fair; and I am yet willing to 
vote for any amendment or scheme of that character which can be suggested. If the 
opposition will not meet us in this spirit — if the Senate pacification bill should be re- 
jected by the House — I must discharge myself henceforth of all responsibility as a sena 
tor and a citizen. I shall have performed my duty to the uttermost ; no blood will be 
upon my skirts, nor any reproach upon my conscience. 

Judge. Douglas, in his report of the 11th of August on the House 
bill for the reorganization of the Territory of Kansas, makes a num- 
ber of telling points against the practical workings of the Topeka con- 
stitution, as adopted by the House of Representatives, which we deem 
proper to present in addition to those already given. They are sub 
stantiall}' as follows, to wit : 

First. Ft incorporates into Kansas a portion of the Cherokee coun- 
try, which the United States has, by treaty, pledged the faith of th« 
nation should never be incorporated into any State or Territory. 

Second. It also incorporates into Kansas about 20,000 square miles 
of Mexico, establislies slavery therein until 1858, and prohibits it 
hereafter, in violation of the laws of the country, and of the compro- 
mise measures of 1850, which guarantied said Territory should come 
'into the Union with or without slavery^ as the people should de- 
termine. 

Third. It legalizes and establishes slavery in Kansas and over a 
portion of New Mexico until 1858, and provides that children hereto- 
fore born shall be slaves for life, and their posterity after them, pro- 
viding they are removed into a slave State or Territory prior to 1858. 

Fourth. It recognizes the validity of the existing laws in Kansas, 
and provides for the faithful execution of them, excej)t punishing 
murder, robbery, larceny, and other crimes. 

Fifth. It provides no guard against illegal voting, frauds in con- 
ducting tlie elections, or violence at the polls ; but legalizes all such 
outrages, by declaring that the law under which they could be pun- 
ished shall not be enforced. 

The report recommends the passage of the bill, which has twice 
passed the Senate, declaring all the obnoxious laws null and void, and 
allowing the people to form a constitution. 



28 



APPENDIX. 



SYNOPSIS OF THE SENATE BILL. 

The first section of the bill provides for the appointment of five 
commissioners, to be appointed by the President and confirmed by the 
Senate, and })rescribes the oath to be taken. ■ 

Sec. 2. And be it further enacted. That it shall be the duty of said commissioners, 
under such regulations as the Secretury of the Interior may prescribe, to cause to be 
made a full and faithful enumeration of- the, legal voters resident in each county iu the 
said Territory on the fourth day of July, eighteen hundred and fifty-six, and make re- 
turns thereof during the month of August next, or as soon thereafter as practicable, one 
of which returns shall be made to the ollice of the Secretary of the Interior, and one to 
the Secretary of the Territory of Kansas, and wliich shall also exhibit tlie names of all 
such legal voters, classed ia such manner as shall be prescribed by the regulations of the 
Secretary of the Interior. 

Sec. 3. And he it further enacted, That it shall be the duty of the Secretary of the 
Interior, immediately after the passage of this act, to prescribe regulations and forma to 
be observed in making the enumeratioH aforesaid, and to furnish the same with all 
necessary printed blanks to each of the commissioners as soon as may be after their 
apjiointment ; and the commissioners shall meet without delay at the seat of govilrnment 
in Kansas Territory, and proceed to the discharge of the duties herein imposed upon 
them, and appoint a secretary to the board, and such other persons as shall be necessary 
to aid and assist them in taking the enumeration herein [)rovided for, who must also be 
duly sworn faithfully, impartially, aud truly to discharge the duties assigned them by the 
eommissioners. 

Section 4th provides for the division of the State into fifty-two rep- 
resentative districts on the basis of the census. 

Sec. 5. And he it further enacted, That the said board, immediately after the appor- 
tionment of the members of said convention, shall cause a sullicieut number of copies 
thereof and of the returns of the cetisus (speciiying the name of each legal voter in 
each county or district) to be published .and distributed among the inhabitants of the 
eeveral counties, and shall transmit one copy of the said apportionment and census, duly 
authenticated by them, to each clerk of a court of record within the I'erritory, who shall 
file the same, and keep open to tlie inspection of every inhabitant who shall desire to 
examine it, and shall also cause other copies to be posted up in at least three of the most 
public places in each voting precinct, to the end that every inhabitant may inspect the 
same, and apply to the board to correct any error he may find therein, iu the manner 
hereinafter provided. 

Sec./6, And he it furtlier enacted, That said board shall remain in session each day, 
Sundays excepted, from the time of making said apportionmer.t until the twentieth day 
of October next, at such places as shall b.e most convenient to the inhabitants of said 
Territory, and shall proceed to the inspection of said returns, and hear, correct, and 
finally determine according to th(i facts, without unreasonalde delay, under proper regu- 
lations to be made by the board for the ascertainment of disputed I'acts concerning said 
enumeration, all questions concerning the omission of any person from said returns, or 
the improper inst-rtion of any name on said returns, and any other questions affecting 
the integrity or fidelity of said returns, and for this purpose the said board and each 
member thereof shall have power to administer oaths and examine witnesses, aud com- 
pel their attendance iu such manner as said board shall deem necessary. 



29 

Sec. 7. Andbe itfuriJicr enacted, That as soon as the said lists of legal voters shall 
thus have been revised and corrected, it shall be the duty of said board to cause copies 
thereof to be printed and distributed t;eni?cally among the inhabitants of the proposed 
State, and one copy shall be deposited with the clerk of each court of record within the 
limits of the proposed State, and one eopy delivered to each judge of the electio-n, and 
at least three copies shall be posted up at, each place of voting. 

Sec. 8. And be it further enacted.. That an election shall be held for members of a 
convention to form a constitution for the State of Kansas, according to the apportion- 
ment to be made aforesaid, on the first, Tuesday after the first Monday in November, 
eighteen hundred and fifty-six, to be held at such places and to be conducted in such 
manner, both as to persons who shall superintend such election and the returns thereof 
as the board of commissioners shall appoint and direct, except in cases by this act other- 
wise provided ; and of such election no person shall be permitted to vote unless his name 
shall ap.pear on said corrected lists. 

Sec. 9. And he it farther enacted, That the board of commissioners shall have power, 
and it shall be their duty, to make all needful rule.s and regulations for the conduct of 
the said election and the returns thereof They shall appoint three suitable persons to 
be judges of the election at each place of voting, and prescribe the mode of supplying 
vacancies. They shall cause copies of the rules and regulations, with a notice of the 
places of holding elections and the names of the judges, to be published and distributed 
in every election district or precinct ten days before the day of election, and shall trans- 
mit a copy thereof to the clerk of each court of record, and one copy to each judge of 
election. 

Sec. 10. And he it further enacted, That the judges of election shall each, before en^ 
teriug on the discharge of his duties, make oath or aftirmatioo that he v/ili faithfully and 
impartially discharge the duties of judge of the election according to law, which oath 
may be administered by any oOicer authorized by law to administer oaths. The clerks 
of election shall be appointed by the judges, and shall take the like oath or affirmation, 
to be administered by one of the judges or by any of the ofhcers aforesaid. Duplicate 
returns of election shall be made and certified by the judges and clerks, one of v.-hich 
shall be deposited in the office of the clerk of the tribunal transacting county business 
for the county in which the election is held, and the other shall be transmitted to the 
board of commissioners, whose duty it shall be to decide, under proper regulations to be 
made by themselves, who are entitled to certificates of election, and to issue such certi- 
ficates accordingly, to the persons who, upon examination of the returns and of such 
proofs as shall be adduced in case of a contest, shall appear to have been duly elected 
in each county or district: Provided, In case of a tie or contest, in which it cannot be 
satisfactorily determined who was duly elected, said commissioners shall order a new 
election in like manner as is herein provided. Upon the completion of these duties the 
said commissioners shall return to Washington, and report their proceedings to the Sec- 
retary of the Interior, whereupon the said commission shall cease and determine. 

Sec. 11. And be it further enacted, That every white male citizen of the United States 
over twenty-one years of age, who may be a bona Jide inhabitant of said Territory on 
the fourth day of July, eighteen hundred and fiity-six, and who shall have resided three 
months next before said election in the county in which he offers to vote, and no other 
persons whatever shall be entitled to vote at said election, and any person qualified as 
a voter may be a delegate to said convention, and no others; aii^i all persons who shall 
possess the other qualifications for voters under this act, and who shall have been Jjona 
fide inhabitants of said Territory at any lime since its organization, and who shall have 
absented themselves therefrom in consequence of the disturbances therein, and who shall 
return before the first day of October next and become bona Jide inhabitants of the Ter 
ritory with the intent of making it their permanent home, and shall present satisfactory 
evidence of these facts to the board of commissioners, shall be entitled to vote at said 
election, and to have their names placed on said corrected list of voters for that purpose; 
and to avoid all conflict in the complete execution of this act, all other elections iu 
said Territory are hereby pospoued until such time as said convention shall appoint. 

Sec. 12. And be it furtlier enacted, That the said commissioners, and all persons 
appointed by them to assist in taking the census, shall have power to administer oaths 
and examine persons on oath in all cases where it shall be necessary to the full and 
faithful performance of their duties under this act ; and the secretary shall keep a jour- 
nal of the proceedings of said board, and transmit copies thereof from time to time to 
the Secretary of the Interior ; and when said commissioners shall have completed the busi- 



30 

^« 

ness of therr appointment, the books and papers of the board shah oe deposited in the 
office of the Secretary of the Territory, and there kept as records of the office. 

The 13tli, 14th, and 15th sections impose severe penalties of fine 
and imprisonment for interrupting or abusing the right of suffrage. 

Sec. 16. And be it further enacted, That the delegates thus elected shall assemble in 
convention at the capitol of said Territory on the first Monday in December next ; and 
when so assembled, shall first determine by a majority of the whole number of raembera 
elected, whether it be or be not expedient at that time to form a constitution and Stats 
government, and if deemed expedient, shall proceed to form a constitution and State 
government, which shall be republican in its form, for admission into the Union on aii 
equal footing with the original States in all respects whatever, by the name of the State 
of Kansas, with the following boundaries, to wit : beginning on the western boundary 
of the State of Missouri, where the thirty-seventh parallel of north latitude crosses the 
game, then west on said parallel to the one hundred and third meridian of longitude, 
then north on said meridian to the fortieth parallel of latitude, then east on said parallel 
of latitude to the western boundary of the State of Missouri, then southward with said 
boundary to the beginning ; and until the next eongressional apportionment the said 
State shall have one representative in the House of Representatives of the United States. 

Section 17th provides for compensation of commissioners. 

Sec. 18. Atid be it furfJier en-acted, That inasmuch as the Constitution of the United 
States and the organic act of said Territory has secured to the inhabitants thereof certain 
inalienable rights, of which they cannot be deprived by any legislative enactment, there- 
fore no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or publio 
trust-, no law shall be in force or enforced in said Territory respecting an establishment 
of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, 
or of the press ; or of the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and petition for 
the redress of grievances ; the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, 
papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated ; 
and no warrant shall issue but upon probable cause, supported by oath or atfifmation, 
and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the person or things to be 
seized ; nor shall the rights of the people to keep and bear arms be infringed. No 
person shall be held to answer for a capital or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a 
presentment or indictment of a grand jury; nor shall any person be subject for the same 
offence to be twice put in jeopardy of li-fe or limb ; nor shall be compelled in any criminal 
case to be a witness against himself, nor deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due 
process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compen- 
sation. In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy aud 
public trial by an impartial jury of the district wherein the crime shall have been com- 
mitted, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed 
of the nature and cause of the accusation ; to be confronted with the witnesses against 
him; to have compulsory process of obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the 
assistance of counsel for his defence. The privilege of habeas corpus shall not be sus- 
pended, unless, when in case of rebellion or invasion, the public safety may require it. 
In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the 
right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by jury shall be otherwise 
re-examined in any court of the United States than according to the rules of the com 
mon law. Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and 
Hnusual punishment inflicted. No law shall be made or have force or eti'ect in said 
Territory which shall require a test oath or oath to support any act of Congress or other 
legislative act as a qualification for any civil office or public trust, or for any empWy- 
mont or profession, or to serve as a juror or vote at an election, or which shall impose 
any tax upon or conditian to the exercise of the right of suffrage by any qualified voter, 
or which shall restrain or prohibit the free discussion of any law or subject of legislation 
in the said Territory, or the free expression of opinion thereon by the people of said 
Terator 



8J^ 



48 92 















% %.^ 



..^^% 



^) 

















"vT, 



'J^S" 



"J*, 



'J>C5- 






y 










v°-'^. 







<^. .^^V:^^^^^ ^^^.^k^^oV ..^V^ife.\V .^^"^y. 



V, 







V ^^ °* O 



<?, 











't o o 



















'€< -^s^^.^^s^Xi^ii'^ ' ^:;<^r .-s; 



* . - - o - O" >^' ^i^^^**^ ^' 




t. .^ ■* 









■•-p. 



J^^'^ 



BINDERY INC. I»l 

^ DEC 91 

^^ N. MANCHESTER' 
INDIANA 46962 






.v^ 




PvL^-'7^o >^.'>!5^S^^^. o^V.^^^^^ 



-OV-" 






